Is it possible to add compile options to an already-installed program?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
If I have installed a program from source (.tar.gz) using ./configure, make, make install – and then later on, want to add a build option (not sure the proper terminology – compile option?), is this possible?
Do I have to uninstall the program first (like make uninstall or something) or, assuming I am using the same source files, can I just run the same ./configure --with-option, make, make install again?
I would like to add an option to a working installation of Squid that wasn't added by default.
software-installation compiling
asked Dec 31 '18 at 1:20
lchraslchras
83
add a comment |
If I have installed a program from source (.tar.gz) using ./configure, make, make install – and then later on, want to add a build option (not sure the proper terminology – compile option?), is this possible?
Do I have to uninstall the program first (like make uninstall or something) or, assuming I am using the same source files, can I just run the same ./configure --with-option, make, make install again?
I would like to add an option to a working installation of Squid that wasn't added by default.
software-installation compiling
asked Dec 31 '18 at 1:20
lchraslchras
83
You can re-run the build process and include the new option at configure time. HOWEVER... backup any modified config files first, as themake installwill likely overwrite with defaults provided.
– ivanivan
Dec 31 '18 at 6:31
add a comment |
If I have installed a program from source (.tar.gz) using ./configure, make, make install – and then later on, want to add a build option (not sure the proper terminology – compile option?), is this possible?
Do I have to uninstall the program first (like make uninstall or something) or, assuming I am using the same source files, can I just run the same ./configure --with-option, make, make install again?
I would like to add an option to a working installation of Squid that wasn't added by default.
software-installation compiling
asked Dec 31 '18 at 1:20
lchraslchras
83
If I have installed a program from source (.tar.gz) using ./configure, make, make install – and then later on, want to add a build option (not sure the proper terminology – compile option?), is this possible?
Do I have to uninstall the program first (like make uninstall or something) or, assuming I am using the same source files, can I just run the same ./configure --with-option, make, make install again?
I would like to add an option to a working installation of Squid that wasn't added by default.
software-installation compiling
software-installation compiling
asked Dec 31 '18 at 1:20
lchraslchras
83
asked Dec 31 '18 at 1:20
lchraslchras
83
edited Jan 1 at 18:19
lchras
asked Dec 31 '18 at 1:20
lchraslchras
83
asked Dec 31 '18 at 1:20
lchraslchras
83
asked Dec 31 '18 at 1:20
lchraslchras
83
83
You can re-run the build process and include the new option at configure time. HOWEVER... backup any modified config files first, as themake installwill likely overwrite with defaults provided.
– ivanivan
Dec 31 '18 at 6:31
add a comment |
You can re-run the build process and include the new option at configure time. HOWEVER... backup any modified config files first, as themake installwill likely overwrite with defaults provided.
– ivanivan
Dec 31 '18 at 6:31
You can re-run the build process and include the new option at configure time. HOWEVER... backup any modified config files first, as the
make install will likely overwrite with defaults provided.– ivanivan
Dec 31 '18 at 6:31
You can re-run the build process and include the new option at configure time. HOWEVER... backup any modified config files first, as the
make install will likely overwrite with defaults provided.– ivanivan
Dec 31 '18 at 6:31
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
To add to Fabby's answer:
The answer to your question is Yes and No.
Yes, it's possible to add compile-time options
to a program that you have installed.
But no, you can't do it without replacing / overwriting the compiled binary.At the risk of belaboring the obvious,
some programs allow you to change how they work
by changing configuration files, without touching the binary.
But then you're talking about configuration options,
not compile-time options.- You generally don't need to uninstall the program;
make installwill replace the existing, installed binary. - In the case of a background process, daemon, server or service,
you should probably make sure that the program is not running
when you replace it.
answered Dec 31 '18 at 20:40
G-ManG-Man
13k93365
To clarify, yes, I would like to replace the binary with a newly compiled one with the additional option added. Both answers were helpful, but I'm accepting this one because it added "you should probably make sure that the program is not running when you replace it" which (duh) I hadn't thought of.
– lchras
Jan 1 at 18:26
The last point is bogus; you can replace a program while it is running. This is not windows ;-). The install(1) utility (which is used bymake install) will not try to open the binary for writing (which is bound to fail withETXBUSY), but will call rename(2) to replace the directory entry, and the running process will continue to use the old binary until restarted.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:17
@Ichras there's no need to make sure the program is not running while you're doingmake install. The process will continue to use the old binary. Try this if you don't believe me:install /bin/sleep /tmp/sleep; /tmp/sleep 400 & install /bin/true /tmp/sleep; ls -l /proc/$!/exe=>... /tmp/sleep (deleted)./proc/PID/exeis linux-specific, but the install/rename/mv behavior is the same on any unix system.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:28
@UncleBilly Ah, okay. So I can just do the regular install, and the effect will be that it will overwrite everything, but I won't be able to use the new options until the process is stopped and restarted?
– lchras
Jan 2 at 0:34
@Ichras. Exactly.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 2 at 6:48
add a comment |
When following the original instructions and adding an additional build option, and recompiling again, the existing version of any program (including squid) will be replaced by the new version.
Therefore, in case you do something stupid disastrous, make a copy of the existing working program before proceeding. ;-)
answered Dec 31 '18 at 1:38
FabbyFabby
3,74811229
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491672%2fis-it-possible-to-add-compile-options-to-an-already-installed-program%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
To add to Fabby's answer:
The answer to your question is Yes and No.
Yes, it's possible to add compile-time options
to a program that you have installed.
But no, you can't do it without replacing / overwriting the compiled binary.At the risk of belaboring the obvious,
some programs allow you to change how they work
by changing configuration files, without touching the binary.
But then you're talking about configuration options,
not compile-time options.- You generally don't need to uninstall the program;
make installwill replace the existing, installed binary. - In the case of a background process, daemon, server or service,
you should probably make sure that the program is not running
when you replace it.
answered Dec 31 '18 at 20:40
G-ManG-Man
13k93365
To clarify, yes, I would like to replace the binary with a newly compiled one with the additional option added. Both answers were helpful, but I'm accepting this one because it added "you should probably make sure that the program is not running when you replace it" which (duh) I hadn't thought of.
– lchras
Jan 1 at 18:26
The last point is bogus; you can replace a program while it is running. This is not windows ;-). The install(1) utility (which is used bymake install) will not try to open the binary for writing (which is bound to fail withETXBUSY), but will call rename(2) to replace the directory entry, and the running process will continue to use the old binary until restarted.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:17
@Ichras there's no need to make sure the program is not running while you're doingmake install. The process will continue to use the old binary. Try this if you don't believe me:install /bin/sleep /tmp/sleep; /tmp/sleep 400 & install /bin/true /tmp/sleep; ls -l /proc/$!/exe=>... /tmp/sleep (deleted)./proc/PID/exeis linux-specific, but the install/rename/mv behavior is the same on any unix system.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:28
@UncleBilly Ah, okay. So I can just do the regular install, and the effect will be that it will overwrite everything, but I won't be able to use the new options until the process is stopped and restarted?
– lchras
Jan 2 at 0:34
@Ichras. Exactly.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 2 at 6:48
add a comment |
To add to Fabby's answer:
The answer to your question is Yes and No.
Yes, it's possible to add compile-time options
to a program that you have installed.
But no, you can't do it without replacing / overwriting the compiled binary.At the risk of belaboring the obvious,
some programs allow you to change how they work
by changing configuration files, without touching the binary.
But then you're talking about configuration options,
not compile-time options.- You generally don't need to uninstall the program;
make installwill replace the existing, installed binary. - In the case of a background process, daemon, server or service,
you should probably make sure that the program is not running
when you replace it.
answered Dec 31 '18 at 20:40
G-ManG-Man
13k93365
To clarify, yes, I would like to replace the binary with a newly compiled one with the additional option added. Both answers were helpful, but I'm accepting this one because it added "you should probably make sure that the program is not running when you replace it" which (duh) I hadn't thought of.
– lchras
Jan 1 at 18:26
The last point is bogus; you can replace a program while it is running. This is not windows ;-). The install(1) utility (which is used bymake install) will not try to open the binary for writing (which is bound to fail withETXBUSY), but will call rename(2) to replace the directory entry, and the running process will continue to use the old binary until restarted.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:17
@Ichras there's no need to make sure the program is not running while you're doingmake install. The process will continue to use the old binary. Try this if you don't believe me:install /bin/sleep /tmp/sleep; /tmp/sleep 400 & install /bin/true /tmp/sleep; ls -l /proc/$!/exe=>... /tmp/sleep (deleted)./proc/PID/exeis linux-specific, but the install/rename/mv behavior is the same on any unix system.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:28
@UncleBilly Ah, okay. So I can just do the regular install, and the effect will be that it will overwrite everything, but I won't be able to use the new options until the process is stopped and restarted?
– lchras
Jan 2 at 0:34
@Ichras. Exactly.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 2 at 6:48
add a comment |
To add to Fabby's answer:
The answer to your question is Yes and No.
Yes, it's possible to add compile-time options
to a program that you have installed.
But no, you can't do it without replacing / overwriting the compiled binary.At the risk of belaboring the obvious,
some programs allow you to change how they work
by changing configuration files, without touching the binary.
But then you're talking about configuration options,
not compile-time options.- You generally don't need to uninstall the program;
make installwill replace the existing, installed binary. - In the case of a background process, daemon, server or service,
you should probably make sure that the program is not running
when you replace it.
answered Dec 31 '18 at 20:40
G-ManG-Man
13k93365
To add to Fabby's answer:
The answer to your question is Yes and No.
Yes, it's possible to add compile-time options
to a program that you have installed.
But no, you can't do it without replacing / overwriting the compiled binary.At the risk of belaboring the obvious,
some programs allow you to change how they work
by changing configuration files, without touching the binary.
But then you're talking about configuration options,
not compile-time options.- You generally don't need to uninstall the program;
make installwill replace the existing, installed binary. - In the case of a background process, daemon, server or service,
you should probably make sure that the program is not running
when you replace it.
answered Dec 31 '18 at 20:40
G-ManG-Man
13k93365
answered Dec 31 '18 at 20:40
G-ManG-Man
13k93365
answered Dec 31 '18 at 20:40
G-ManG-Man
13k93365
answered Dec 31 '18 at 20:40
G-ManG-Man
13k93365
13k93365
To clarify, yes, I would like to replace the binary with a newly compiled one with the additional option added. Both answers were helpful, but I'm accepting this one because it added "you should probably make sure that the program is not running when you replace it" which (duh) I hadn't thought of.
– lchras
Jan 1 at 18:26
The last point is bogus; you can replace a program while it is running. This is not windows ;-). The install(1) utility (which is used bymake install) will not try to open the binary for writing (which is bound to fail withETXBUSY), but will call rename(2) to replace the directory entry, and the running process will continue to use the old binary until restarted.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:17
@Ichras there's no need to make sure the program is not running while you're doingmake install. The process will continue to use the old binary. Try this if you don't believe me:install /bin/sleep /tmp/sleep; /tmp/sleep 400 & install /bin/true /tmp/sleep; ls -l /proc/$!/exe=>... /tmp/sleep (deleted)./proc/PID/exeis linux-specific, but the install/rename/mv behavior is the same on any unix system.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:28
@UncleBilly Ah, okay. So I can just do the regular install, and the effect will be that it will overwrite everything, but I won't be able to use the new options until the process is stopped and restarted?
– lchras
Jan 2 at 0:34
@Ichras. Exactly.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 2 at 6:48
add a comment |
To clarify, yes, I would like to replace the binary with a newly compiled one with the additional option added. Both answers were helpful, but I'm accepting this one because it added "you should probably make sure that the program is not running when you replace it" which (duh) I hadn't thought of.
– lchras
Jan 1 at 18:26
The last point is bogus; you can replace a program while it is running. This is not windows ;-). The install(1) utility (which is used bymake install) will not try to open the binary for writing (which is bound to fail withETXBUSY), but will call rename(2) to replace the directory entry, and the running process will continue to use the old binary until restarted.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:17
@Ichras there's no need to make sure the program is not running while you're doingmake install. The process will continue to use the old binary. Try this if you don't believe me:install /bin/sleep /tmp/sleep; /tmp/sleep 400 & install /bin/true /tmp/sleep; ls -l /proc/$!/exe=>... /tmp/sleep (deleted)./proc/PID/exeis linux-specific, but the install/rename/mv behavior is the same on any unix system.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:28
@UncleBilly Ah, okay. So I can just do the regular install, and the effect will be that it will overwrite everything, but I won't be able to use the new options until the process is stopped and restarted?
– lchras
Jan 2 at 0:34
@Ichras. Exactly.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 2 at 6:48
To clarify, yes, I would like to replace the binary with a newly compiled one with the additional option added. Both answers were helpful, but I'm accepting this one because it added "you should probably make sure that the program is not running when you replace it" which (duh) I hadn't thought of.
– lchras
Jan 1 at 18:26
To clarify, yes, I would like to replace the binary with a newly compiled one with the additional option added. Both answers were helpful, but I'm accepting this one because it added "you should probably make sure that the program is not running when you replace it" which (duh) I hadn't thought of.
– lchras
Jan 1 at 18:26
The last point is bogus; you can replace a program while it is running. This is not windows ;-). The install(1) utility (which is used by
make install) will not try to open the binary for writing (which is bound to fail with ETXBUSY), but will call rename(2) to replace the directory entry, and the running process will continue to use the old binary until restarted.– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:17
The last point is bogus; you can replace a program while it is running. This is not windows ;-). The install(1) utility (which is used by
make install) will not try to open the binary for writing (which is bound to fail with ETXBUSY), but will call rename(2) to replace the directory entry, and the running process will continue to use the old binary until restarted.– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:17
@Ichras there's no need to make sure the program is not running while you're doing
make install. The process will continue to use the old binary. Try this if you don't believe me: install /bin/sleep /tmp/sleep; /tmp/sleep 400 & install /bin/true /tmp/sleep; ls -l /proc/$!/exe => ... /tmp/sleep (deleted). /proc/PID/exe is linux-specific, but the install/rename/mv behavior is the same on any unix system.– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:28
@Ichras there's no need to make sure the program is not running while you're doing
make install. The process will continue to use the old binary. Try this if you don't believe me: install /bin/sleep /tmp/sleep; /tmp/sleep 400 & install /bin/true /tmp/sleep; ls -l /proc/$!/exe => ... /tmp/sleep (deleted). /proc/PID/exe is linux-specific, but the install/rename/mv behavior is the same on any unix system.– Uncle Billy
Jan 1 at 20:28
@UncleBilly Ah, okay. So I can just do the regular install, and the effect will be that it will overwrite everything, but I won't be able to use the new options until the process is stopped and restarted?
– lchras
Jan 2 at 0:34
@UncleBilly Ah, okay. So I can just do the regular install, and the effect will be that it will overwrite everything, but I won't be able to use the new options until the process is stopped and restarted?
– lchras
Jan 2 at 0:34
@Ichras. Exactly.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 2 at 6:48
@Ichras. Exactly.
– Uncle Billy
Jan 2 at 6:48
add a comment |
When following the original instructions and adding an additional build option, and recompiling again, the existing version of any program (including squid) will be replaced by the new version.
Therefore, in case you do something stupid disastrous, make a copy of the existing working program before proceeding. ;-)
answered Dec 31 '18 at 1:38
FabbyFabby
3,74811229
add a comment |
When following the original instructions and adding an additional build option, and recompiling again, the existing version of any program (including squid) will be replaced by the new version.
Therefore, in case you do something stupid disastrous, make a copy of the existing working program before proceeding. ;-)
answered Dec 31 '18 at 1:38
FabbyFabby
3,74811229
add a comment |
When following the original instructions and adding an additional build option, and recompiling again, the existing version of any program (including squid) will be replaced by the new version.
Therefore, in case you do something stupid disastrous, make a copy of the existing working program before proceeding. ;-)
answered Dec 31 '18 at 1:38
FabbyFabby
3,74811229
When following the original instructions and adding an additional build option, and recompiling again, the existing version of any program (including squid) will be replaced by the new version.
Therefore, in case you do something stupid disastrous, make a copy of the existing working program before proceeding. ;-)
answered Dec 31 '18 at 1:38
FabbyFabby
3,74811229
answered Dec 31 '18 at 1:38
FabbyFabby
3,74811229
answered Dec 31 '18 at 1:38
FabbyFabby
3,74811229
answered Dec 31 '18 at 1:38
FabbyFabby
3,74811229
3,74811229
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491672%2fis-it-possible-to-add-compile-options-to-an-already-installed-program%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
You can re-run the build process and include the new option at configure time. HOWEVER... backup any modified config files first, as the
make installwill likely overwrite with defaults provided.– ivanivan
Dec 31 '18 at 6:31